25 years of sportbike development

[Dave]

Originally Posted by smileyman

You guys may be right, I just now how much volumetric efficiency and advances have been made. I mean look at an F18. Awesome performance but engine replaced every 1000 hours or so. Ragged edge tuning may not be so ragged edge for an OEM that makes 220 hp 800cc engines!?

Remember back when a literbike was a hoss at 119 hp? It has come a long way...

Originally Posted by derf

Eventually they are going to hit a wall where they can't improve power without sacraficing reliability, its bound to happen eventually.

The way it wil work out is that a few years from now they are gonna pop out a liter bike that makes 200 whp, but after 10k mi a nice chunk of the bikes on the road are gonna blow their engines. Then the oem will fix the problem for a few years, but in their quest to keep up with the competition they will eventually build a weak engine.

Suzuki went through this cycle recently with the frame snapping issue, they did everything they could to shave weight until they created a major weak spot in the bike. Then they fixed it and now the weight is bellow that when they had frame problems. Eventually they just can't get rid of any more weight, unless they create some kind of anti gravity thingy.

the only place they really have left to gain powerwise is rpm. we already have solenoid driven velocity stacks and e throttles. next is going to be on the fly cam advancement and or some form of variable lift cam (i know already failed on vfr) and then pneumatic poppet valves. downsides besides added weight for parts are gonna be lighter more expensive internals. but maaan the first group to get it right...

[derf]

Originally Posted by Dave

the only place they really have left to gain powerwise is rpm. we already have solenoid driven velocity stacks and e throttles. next is going to be on the fly cam advancement and or some form of variable lift cam (i know already failed on vfr) and then pneumatic poppet valves. downsides besides added weight for parts are gonna be lighter more expensive internals. but maaan the first group to get it right...

Direct cylinder fuel injection, an I 5 engine design, the list can go on for quite a while

[Mr Lefty]

I can't see me, in 10 years being able to ride a street bike for very long... with as track focused they've become in the last 5 years... I can't imagine how uncomfortable they'd be for even a 100 mile jaunt.

the numbers are impressive... but I don't see a point... but then again I'm not a racer. I would rather them focus on makine the bike more rider friendly, little more attention to safety... brighter headlights... tail lights, blinkers, and mirrors that aren't just after thoughts... guages that tell us more info... or has GPS built in... a sport tourer that is more sport than tourer... something with the comfort of a late 90's street bike but with the handeling, weight and power of a 08 or 09.

Idk... just my thoughts

[tached1000rr]

Originally Posted by eBBs15

I can't see me, in 10 years being able to ride a street bike for very long... with as track focused they've become in the last 5 years... I can't imagine how uncomfortable they'd be for even a 100 mile jaunt.

the numbers are impressive... but I don't see a point... but then again I'm not a racer. I would rather them focus on makine the bike more rider friendly, little more attention to safety... brighter headlights... tail lights, blinkers, and mirrors that aren't just after thoughts... guages that tell us more info... or has GPS built in... a sport tourer that is more sport than tourer... something with the comfort of a late 90's street bike but with the handeling, weight and power of a 08 or 09.

Idk... just my thoughts

I agree and have always said each of the big four needs more choices just under the race replicas, focused more on practicality for the street oriented crowd.

[No Worries]

Maybe they should graph how the midrange torque has decreased as the horsepower and rpm range has increased. I use midrange torque dozens of times a day. High rpm horsepower? Once a day if I'm lucky.

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by No Worries

Maybe they should graph how the midrange torque has decreased as the horsepower and rpm range has increased. I use midrange torque dozens of times a day. High rpm horsepower? Once a day if I'm lucky.

I'm not sure you're right there, NW. I'm sure that my bike has more torque than yours. Although I do agree that torque has hit a wall since my 1997 YZF1000 had about the same torque numbers as my 2006 GSXR1000 does. For some reason, and it may be on purpose,torque has hovered around 80 ft/lbs in the liter class. It may be that tires aren't good enough for much more than that... You have to remember that whenever the OEMs have produced an engine that was "better" than the corresponding brakes, suspension and tires pandemonium has followed!!!

[tached1000rr]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

I'm not sure you're right there, NW. I'm sure that my bike has more torque than yours. Although I do agree that torque has hit a wall since my 1997 YZF1000 had about the same torque numbers as my 2006 GSXR1000 does. For some reason, and it may be on purpose,torque has hovered around 80 ft/lbs in the liter class. It may be that tires aren't good enough for much more than that... You have to remember that whenever the OEMs have produced an engine that was "better" than the corresponding brakes, suspension and tires pandemonium has followed!!!

I think the difference may lie in where the torque peak occurs between the older and newer models. Older models produced their peak torque at a lower rpm than say the 08-09 class right? I'm not stating fact but just asking as I've not looked for any direct comparsions.

[karl_1052]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

I'm not sure you're right there, NW. I'm sure that my bike has more torque than yours. Although I do agree that torque has hit a wall since my 1997 YZF1000 had about the same torque numbers as my 2006 GSXR1000 does. For some reason, and it may be on purpose,torque has hovered around 80 ft/lbs in the liter class. It may be that tires aren't good enough for much more than that... You have to remember that whenever the OEMs have produced an engine that was "better" than the corresponding brakes, suspension and tires pandemonium has followed!!!

Torque is a function of engine capacity and engine efficiency. The only way to increase torque is to increase engine size.

HP is a function of torque at a specific rpm. Raise the RPM capacity and the HP goes up, but torque will always be the same.

My bike makes 80lb-ft from about 3000 rpm to over 10000rpm, with a peak of just over 100lb-ft at around 8000rpm. All due to the long stroke motor with an additional 340cc over a liter.

[Antwanny]

Originally Posted by No Worries

Maybe they should graph how the midrange torque has decreased as the horsepower and rpm range has increased. I use midrange torque dozens of times a day. High rpm horsepower? Once a day if I'm lucky.

agreed but when you use the horsepower its too much fun

[smileyman]

Yeah 200 hp is doable with what they have now. I just dont think that is very high since WSBK is around that figure reliably now. But say GP levels at 1000cc, 240 hp in a warranty and EPA/dot package would run about as spensive as the Desmodici. Tigger is right can be done. Probably wont though...